9-7 good enough?

[Sky King]

CM3 took one for the team and moved to ILB in 2014 & 2015 and everyone knew he was out of position and sacrificing his stats by doing so. He was also paid almost $24Mill over that time to be an ILB which, just guessing, was probably a top 3 pay for ILB's (if not top!).

He was/is paid like a premium, top tier OLB who should be dominating and leading the team. Due to injuries and decline he's barely "just a guy" yet still getting $13.75Mil in '16. I admire him for moving positions and playing hurt, but his production is nowhere near $13-$15Mil/yr. which is what his contract calls for.

I highly doubt any team will trade a high round pick to assume his 2yr/$22.5Mil remaining base salary, which leaves drastic pay cut or his outright release as viable options. TT could completely go against his normal mode and sign 2 proven FA OLB's for 1/2 of CM3's $11.1Mil and potentially get better production and depth.

Until he is finally healthy the decline is merely theoretical. The playing out of position is a given.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Until he is finally healthy the decline is merely theoretical. The playing out of position is a given.

As is his being worth the value of his contract, theoretical that is. I won't pretend to have the information that TT and the Packers have on Clay, but I think they will make the right decision based on that information.

 

[Sky King]

As is his being worth the value of his contract, theoretical that is. I won't pretend to have the information that TT and the Packers have on Clay, but I think they will make the right decision based on that information.

Yeah, whatever that may be. We may not know until the end of camp next Summer, same as with Sitton.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yeah, whatever that may be. We may not know until the end of camp next Summer, same as with Sitton.

I really hope that they don't take that long in order to make the decision and end up getting absolutely nothing for Clay. The circumstances are also different between the 2 players. The Packers became confident in Taylor being able to replace Sitton, which allowed them to save some money. Sitton's contract was also up at the end of this year, as well as rumors of him becoming a distraction. I think with Clay it will just be a matter of "Is he healthy? Yes? Is he worth the money over the next 1-2 years?"

I don't think anyone is saying Clay is washed up and shouldn't be playing in the NFL, more than they are saying, will his play equal his pay?

 

[Sky King]

I really hope that they don't take that long in order to make the decision and end up getting absolutely nothing for Clay. The circumstances are also different between the 2 players. The Packers became confident in Taylor being able to replace Sitton, which allowed them to save some money. Sitton's contract was also up at the end of this year, as well as rumors of him becoming a distraction. I think with Clay it will just be a matter of "Is he healthy? Yes? Is he worth the money over the next 1-2 years?"

I don't think anyone is saying Clay is washed up and shouldn't be playing in the NFL, more than they are saying, will his play equal his pay?

With a dearth of pass-rushers in the NFL and everyone is on the hunt to find good ones. When he's been healthy Clay has also been one of the best. Personally, I would like to see what he can do when he's healthy again before kicking him to the curb. Hopefully, Thompson does, too.

 

[swhitset]

I really hope that they don't take that long in order to make the decision and end up getting absolutely nothing for Clay. The circumstances are also different between the 2 players. The Packers became confident in Taylor being able to replace Sitton, which allowed them to save some money. Sitton's contract was also up at the end of this year, as well as rumors of him becoming a distraction. I think with Clay it will just be a matter of "Is he healthy? Yes? Is he worth the money over the next 1-2 years?"

I don't think anyone is saying Clay is washed up and shouldn't be playing in the NFL, more than they are saying, will his play equal his pay?

I agree... however this whole conversation makes me ponder the whole conceptof a player being worth his pay. Taken to an extreme, any team that achieves this with all their players should win the Superbowl provided they are spending most of their available cap money. It certainly should be the goal... but obviously rarely happens.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree... however this whole conversation makes me ponder the whole conceptof a player being worth his pay. Taken to an extreme, any team that achieves this with all their players should win the Superbowl provided they are spending most of their available cap money. It certainly should be the goal... but obviously rarely happens.

I agree, but you will never achieve the idea of everyone playing for what they are worth and that goes both ways. Right now Monty is totally being underpaid for what he is contributing. You just hope that it balances out and injuries play a big part in it as well, because that cap money doesn't reset or pause for an injured player. Obviously when you start getting into the top 5-10 paid players on your team, the importance of pay=play becomes very important, otherwise chances are the rest of your roster is either really young or not that great and if they aren't over achieving to cover the deficiencies of an overpaid player, chances are your team is suffering.

 

[Un4GivN]

I agree, but you will never achieve the idea of everyone playing for what they are worth and that goes both ways. Right now Monty is totally being underpaid for what he is contributing. You just hope that it balances out and injuries play a big part in it as well, because that cap money doesn't reset or pause for an injured player. Obviously when you start getting into the top 5-10 paid players on your team, the importance of pay=play becomes very important, otherwise chances are the rest of your roster is either really young or not that great and if they aren't over achieving to cover the deficiencies of an overpaid player, chances are your team is suffering.

True that.

Davante Adams in 2016 made $1,072,746. So far has 65 catches for 922 yards and 9 scores. Or approximately $16,503 per catch

Randall Cobb in 2016 made $9,150,000. So far has 60 catches for 610 yards and 4 scores. Or approximately $152,500 per catch

So Cobb makes about 10 times more per catch than Adams.... Just works out that way sometimes.

 

[OldSchool101]

No. To the 9-7 question. As far as CM3, I'd rather have two 7 million dollar OLBs. Give me 2 Brian Orakpos

 

[Un4GivN]

No. To the 9-7 question

The actual answer is yes, but highly unlikely. The Packers can lock-in a playoff spot this week meaning next week it wouldn't matter if they win. But it would take a lot of things falling in place.

The chance is even better when you look at two weeks, I believe all they need to do is win this game against the Vikings and have TB lose 1 (maybe two depending on the SOV things works out) and Washington 1 of two.

 

[Sky King]

...As far as CM3, I'd rather have two 7 million dollar OLBs. Give me 2 Brian Orakpos

One's not available and the other doesn't exist. What's your plan B?

 

[OldSchool101]

One's not available and the other doesn't exist. What's your plan B?

Oh crap! nohody said anything about a backup plan! Call Clay back and continue to overpay the man, throw him an extra 100,000 for accidentally firing him prematurely and Tell him it was my faultt, we thought he was gonna retire based on his recent performance.

 

[rodell330]

The question will be if our offense can run score for score with the opponent. Jordy is looking faster and faster every week. I think the offense have enough weapons to run score for score with any team.

Yea but we don't usually win shoot outs. I'd rather have a big lead and have defense almost squander it away in the 4th quarter..than to have a shootout just see us go up by 3 or 4pts with 3 minutes left in the game...just to watch the defense get scored on with hardly any time on the clock. IJS.

 

[Sky King]

Oh crap! nohody said anything about a backup plan! Call Clay back and continue to overpay the man, throw him an extra 100,000 for accidentally firing him prematurely and Tell him it was my faultt, we thought he was gonna retire based on his recent performance.

No need to call him back or do any of those other things. He's still here.

 

[Poppa San]

No need to call him back or do any of those other things. He's still here.

GB has a small airport. Tough to find flights out of town more than a few times a day. Hope you like changing flights in Detroit or Ohare.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I like the idea of Mathews playing 20 seasons for us, like the dad and uncle did for their teams... But we paid him ALOT of $$$....... That alone is just too much for one guy who isn't playing QB. IMO.

15.2mil next year (4.1 dead cap)
12.5 with no dead cap 2018...

That's 11.1 mil next year, and 11.4 mil free and clear 2018, if GB traded Mathews...

Its becoming more of an option as the young guys contracts come up. Sitton/Lang out, Bahk in. Peppers out, Perry in? Mathews out, We get to keep Burnett/Haha combo??? Im just throwing that out there, but be sure some hard decisions are going to have to be made... Im pissed at Allan Barbre . Mathews at 100% could have changed games the last couple weeks since Perry went down. But instead its another injury for both our OLBs... Next year without Peppers? That has me nervous too. We don't know how much he does, because he never misses games...Last 3 years at least.... These LB injuries are killing us.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If Matthews and his agent were to be asked to take a pay cut they may in turn ask the Packers for his release. Like Sitton, if Matthews were released he would likely field multiple offers from other teams. Lucrative offers because that's what it would take. Any NFL GM looking to bolster their pass rush (and who isn't?) would explore signing Matthews.

There might be several teams offering Matthews a decent contract because of him being a big name but not based on his performance lately.

Agreed that he's not been himself. Between the hammy and the shoulder that might help to explain it. We know for certain that the shoulder is still bothering him and that it may require surgery after the season is over. Yet, he still plays through the pain. Anyone who has ever suffered a significant shoulder injury can attest to the severity of the pain and the lack of strength that goes along with it. Whether the hamstring is still bothering him is anyone's guess. He's a tough guy, however. He deserves his due for that.

Matthews deserves credit for being a tough guy but I don't know if him playing currently does anything good for the team.

Until he is finally healthy the decline is merely theoretical. The playing out of position is a given.

You continue to ignore that Matthews' performance has considerably regressed even when healthy.

One's not available and the other doesn't exist. What's your plan B?

There's currently no reason to talk about replacing Matthews as it would be in the Packers best interest to renegotiate his contract. In addition it's too early to know which players will be available in March.

 

[Sky King]

There might be several teams offering Matthews a decent contract because of him being a big name but not based on his performance lately.

Well, of course he's not been himself. He's been injured. His perceived high-end value for any new contract will be most heavily predicated on how he played when healthy, same as it was with his current contract. And if he were to become a true free-agent because TT cuts him then his health will also be factored into his value, especially if there are considerable multi-season availability issues. But that could also be offset somewhat by supply and demand. Pass-rushers are very hard to come by.

Matthews deserves credit for being a tough guy but I don't know if him playing currently does anything good for the team.

It's true he's not been himself lately. There were also limitations on who was available to help out at OL if he sat for recovery. He has had to play when, ideally, he may have needed to be given more time to heal. Perry was lost weeks ago. So was Fackrell, who had limited snaps against the Bears after sitting out a couple of games with his own hamstring issue. And for the past two games Elliott, like Perry, has had his hand in a club. That leaves Peppers, Jones and Matthews and not much else for rotation. Matthews was asked to play - hurt or not. He was also asked to play ILB when both Martinez and Ryan were injured.

You continue to ignore that Matthews' performance has considerably regressed even when healthy.

There's currently no reason to talk about replacing Matthews as it would be in the Packers best interest to renegotiate his contract. In addition it's too early to know which players will be available in March.

I'm not the one calling for Matthews or his contract to be replaced. I agree that it would be best to retain Matthews and he already has a contract. Even though his health has been less-than 100% nearly all season long, his snaps are down, plus he's missed several full games this season because of injury, despite these handicaps he's still one of the team's top three in sacks. So, who do you propose should replace him with, now or in the future? Will TT ask him to renegotiate after the team has also asked him to play out of position for much of the two last three seasons, plus one-armed and one-legged for most of this season? Perhaps. Would Matthews ask for his outright release if he were asked to renegotiate, all things considered? Perhaps.

Nonsense that I'm ignoring his performances of late. Which games was he 100% healthy? He's been on the injury report for the past eight games. Prior to that he missed the game against Detroit. Since defensive snap counts, per game, are an indicator of a starter's health. Matthews high-water mark for snaps this year occurred in the season opener against Jacksonville at 74% of all defensive snaps. He recorded one sack in that game. Despite playing only 50% of the snaps against NY he also recorded a sack. Against Minnesota he played 66% of the snaps and recorded another sack. His sacks tailed-off as the season progressed and the injuries compounded. So if stats tell the story, and we all know that you live and breath by the stats, he's been ailing since week 2. I repeat, it's you who is ignoring that his performances have been affected by his injuries and that for most of the previous two seasons he played out of position.

C'mon now. All those scheduled to become FAs after this season are already known. But will TT compete to sign any of the premier FAs who will become available when the NFL calendar allows it? History can answer that quite accurately, same as it can answer whether he will pay-up to retain his own. If Hell freezes over between now and March maybe he'll sign a top-tier FA. But the signing of a premiere FA replacement for Matthews (in TT's world) would be amongst the longest of long-shots. I wouldn't bet the farm on it. Second tier FA? Maybe, if cheap enough and nobody else aggressively competes for them. Third-tier or lower / street FAs? Now that's TT's playground.

 

[Half Empty]

Any significance to the italics?

 

[Pkrjones]

Sky King slid into his Irish Gaelic accent after his first bloody mary, this morning.

 

[rodell330]

Any significance to the italics?

He was saying all that in his Mel Gibson Braveheart voice

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just out of curiosity, for those proponents of continuing to pay Clay on his current contract, at what point do you declare a guy as injury prone and not being able to play up to his contract? Isn't this the kind of thought process currently being done with the potential re-signing of Eddie Lacy (including his conditioning)? If Clays current contract was up, what would you be willing to pay him?

Another thought, do you shift Clay permanently to ILB, where he seemed to play injury free, let him better learn the position, potentially extend the length of his career and be paid as an ILB? According to the article below, Clay has a tendency to get nicked up at OLB and as a result, his play has suffered. Obviously, this permanent position change would call for Clay taking a paycut.

http://www.espn.com/blog/green-bay-...hews-more-susceptible-to-injuries-at-old-spot

 

[Pkrjones]

...Another thought, do you shift Clay permanently to ILB, where he seemed to play injury free, let him better learn the position, potentially extend the length of his career and be paid as an ILB? According to the article below, Clay has a tendency to get nicked up at OLB and as a result, his play has suffered. Obviously, this permanent position change would call for Clay taking a paycut.

http://www.espn.com/blog/green-bay-...hews-more-susceptible-to-injuries-at-old-spot

Actually CM3 was lined-up at ILB on the play that Barbre blindsided him and hurt his shoulder, so I don't think a position change helps him stay on the field more.
http://www.thedailyjournal.com/stor...ws-green-bay-allen-barbre-block-hit/94690166/

 

[Sky King]

Any significance to the italics?

No. I was having trouble figuring-out the response fprmat under the "quote" button. In the original that I was quoting the paragraphs separated in the working draft. All lines appeared to be of the same font, so I altered my responses with italic font. I'm not well-practiced at critiquing everyone's responses to get the last word in.

 

[Half Empty]

OK, just checking. Whenever I see anything new/unfamiliar, I figure I've missed another part of the puzzle.